SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(MP) 53

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Deepak Kumar Agarwal, J.
Shrilal v. State of M.P.
Criminal Revision No. 745 of 2007 (G); Decided on 13.3.2023

Advocates:
Anand Kumar Gupta for petitioners; C.P. Singh, Panel Lawyer, for respondent/State.

Headnote:

Penal Code, 1860 -- S. 325 r/w S. 34 -- conviction for marpeet with lathi -- sentenced to undergo 3 months RI -- incident more than 25 years old -- petitioners already suffered one month of custody period -- sentence reduced to period already undergone to meet ends of justice -- fine enhanced from Rs. 3,000/- to Rs. 5,000/- payable to complainant. [Para 6]

naM lafgrk] 1860 & èkkjk 325 lgifBr èkkjk 34 & ykBh ls ekjihV d¢ fy, n¨"kflf) & 3 ekl dk dB¨j dkjkokl Ò¨xus dk naMkns'k & ÄVuk 25 o"kZ ls vfèkd iqjkuh & ;kphx.k ,d ekl dh vfÒj{kk dkykofèk igys gh Òksx pqds & U;k; d¢ mn~ns'; iw.kZ djus d¢ fy, naMkns'k igys gh Òksxh xà dkykofèk rd ÄVk;k x;k & ifjoknh d¨ lans; tqekZuk #i;s 3]000@& ls cढ+kdj #i;s 5]000@& fd;k x;kA ¼iSjk 6½

ORDER

1. This revision under section 397/401 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners against the judgment dated 3.9.2007 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Chachoda District Guna (M.P.) in Criminal Appeal No.212/2007 affirming the judgment dated 16.3.2007 passed in criminal case No.508/2005 by JMFC Chachoda District Guna by which petitioners have been convicted for the offence punishable under section 325/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 3 months R.I. with fine of Rs. 300/- each with default stipulation.

2. In brief facts of the case are that on 22.2.1997 complainant Shivraj Singh lodged a report against petitioners that they committed marpeet with him by means of Lathi due to which he got fracture. Report was lodged. After investigation, charge-sheet in the matter was filed. Learned trial Court after appreciating the evidence on record, convicted the petitioners for the aforesaid offence.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners/accused submitted that he does not want to challenge the conviction of the petitioners for the aforesaid offence. As regards sentence, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the incident took place on 22.2.1997. Petitioners are facing ordeal of trial for the last more than 25 years. Petitioners have suffered one month of custody period as against three months of sentence awarded. Therefore, while enhancing the fine amount suitably, sentence of the petitioners be reduced to the period already undergone by them.

4. Learned counsel for the State supported the impugned judgment.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, ends of justice would meet if while reducing the jail sentence of the petitioners to the period already undergone by them, the fine is enhanced from Rs.300/- to Rs.5000/- each under section 325/34 of IPC. Accordingly, while affirming the conviction of the petitioners under section 325/34 of IPC, jail sentence of the petitioners is reduced to the period already undergone by them and fine amount is enhanced from Rs.300/- to Rs.5000/- each which shall be deposited by them within a period of one month from today before the trial Court, failing which the petitioners will have to suffer the sentence as awarded by the Courts below. The amount of fine so deposited by the petitioners be given to the complainant under section 357 of Cr.P.C. as compensation.

With the aforesaid, the revision stands disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top